Approved articles vs. Legalese

[Yuval Langer]

Why do CZ editor-approved articles say, "The Citizendium Foundation and Citizendium participants make no representations about the reliability of this article"? If they don't say it's reliable, what is CZ for?

[Aleta Curry]

You're not the first one to point this out, Yuval, there's a thread around here someplace....

[Martin Baldwin-Edwards]

Yes, one of many loose threads  The reason is to protect against litigation. We hope that the phrasing can be improved, but it is not an immediate priority,

[Derek Harkness]

The main contradiction is "Citizendium participants make no representations" clearly an approved article is stating the exact opposite of this. An editor is making a representation that the content is reliable.

The warning should be more along the lines of "CZ takes no responsibility for the use of this content by 3rd parties or the suitability of this content for any purpose". We do want to represent our content as accurate but we don't want any responsibility for what happens should you use the content.

[Aleta Curry]

"The warning should be..." in teeny weeny little letters?   

[Martin Baldwin-Edwards]

I don't know: this really is a matter for an experienced US attorney with some knowledge of international implications for online information sources. It's a tough nut...